To consider Konstantin Kisin as someone from the "traditional right" is to be naive. From what I know of him, although he is not a progressive, he has positions in common with those of many people on the "traditional right" but in the end of the day its essence and fundamental position is liberal.
Part of the problem is that nobody knows what 'liberal' even means anymore. Traditional English liberalism? French style? New American liberalism? A fundamental problem with having thought processes that are more 'liberal' I.e. 'live and let live' is that nobody on the liberal side of things thinks its their responsibility to control their crazies. Konstantin is one of very few voices of 'classic English liberalism' that actually raises his voice and calls out when the liberals get crazy, which they manifestly have of late. That's why people listen to what he says.
@@scoon2117 What I mean is that Konstatin is more in the center/left. He agrees with some "right" positions in the cultural and social side, simply due to common sense that is currently missing on the "left" and because he suffered . He criticizes the woke as something that harmed him professionally in the past as comedian and realized that his criticism has helped him professionally in the present. It won't be long before he starts commenting and criticizing the phantom threat of the "nationalist-christian" movement on the rise...
I can't stand this guy anymore. He never gets to the point. He wants white people to play liberalism while the rest, him included, is playing tribalism. It's over now.
I still like him but I am disgusted by his disregard of common sense concerns about national sovereignty and White replacement. Classical liberalism and traditional conservative principles are great but they won't matter when we've been over-run by savages.
what guy you talking about ? I hope you dont mean BB, he is still one of the few out there that seems rational to me... If you mean Kisin, im with you 100%.
I love Benjamin, but he seems woefully in over his head here. Not watching Carlson's interview of Cooper makes a genuine back and forth impossible. For a guy who obviously knows how to put in the work, it's a shocking screw up.
Agreed. It's one thing not to read a 500-page book in advance. It's quite another thing to not bother watching a video. *Reply to:* _"I love Benjamin, but he seems woefully in over his head here. Not watching Carlson's interview of Cooper makes a genuine back and forth impossible. For a guy who obviously knows how to put in the work, it's a shocking screw up."_
It’s on me. I watched a couple of Cooper’s response episodes and interviews, then started working through Fear and Loathing … now watching the Tucker interview and I still have a more positive view of Cooper than Kisin does. All that said, I feel embarrassed with my lack of preparation here.
Not watching the interview is a bomb fuckup but even things outside of the original topic like 19:02 bothered me, a lot of studying history is just reading historians. That's whose writing you dig into archives for. It's not all 100% of it but a big lot of it. Many times people who write things down haven't been there when they happened or even lived at the same time. Historians should go through multiple such writers and form a conclusion that can use multiple other sources like archaeological evidence or something. Even the off topic is wack Benjamin gives on what isn't anyones to give on
@@BenjaminABoyce - I can't say enough how much I respect the work you do and how you approach it. Substance, a generous spirit and good faith are a rare combination these days, especially online. I put Konstantin in the same category, and was eager for the exchange. And there was a lot of good stuff in it. And so I frankly feel a bit badly for making a negative comment, especially when I rarely comment at all. Don't let the bastards (like me) get you down. Thanks for putting yourself out there. It's a lot harder than taking pot shots from the gallery. 🙂
Well, even if he watched the interview 40 times. There are so many lies in that interview. Lies that can be spotted and proved. Piers Morgan talked about that (I will give you a link). Let me name just the biggest lie. They blame Churchill for the escalation of the war, while he was not a prime minister. So he couldn't have provoked Hilter even if he had wanted to. It is so stupid. How can any not see that? th-cam.com/video/53x0FECym2M/w-d-xo.html
Kissen have no problem with Yarvin's take. He does not even really care about Coopers. But he use it, because Cooper in the past have pointed out how zionism have caused so much problems for Israel and the middle east. Because the zionists are not willing to make deals that could bring peace. So he try to use this to attack Cooper so he will no longer speak about zionism (that is not the same as jews).
Im starting to understand why critique of the left from within a liberal framework can never really matter. These IDW types are polishing brass on the titanic.
So who on the right do you fully support then? I just don’t think anyone has the answer as for what practical steps to take to fix the problems we now see. Kisin said we need to vote the right people in but who are these saviors that we can put our faith in..? I’m just not seeing that person anywhere in the political scene
@@brianmeen2158 this question, I believe it's in good faith so I'll try to answer it in good faith. I think you need to step outside of the framework. Look at the words you are using. Fixing the problem in practical steps. Voting the right person in. Your thinking presupposes so much. You probably don't see it that way, and I'm not saying you are wrong even. But you do need to realize that these things are actually not a neutral starting point, and need justification to be asserted.
A good discussion but Benjamin not seeing the Tucker interview with Cooper obviously dinged this discussion. Maybe Benjamin could watch it and post a quick observation about it.
Yes. It's important to quantity it in as precise way as you can. It's difficult though. Your clarification tends to mirror the divided brain perceptions laid out by Iain McGillchrist in his book "The Master and his Emissary". Jordan Peterson makes an interesting case with regards to belief systems particularly in the religious domain that without an overarching "narrative" of some kind civilisation fractures into a shambles of differing narratives forcing infinite value systems. So it may be that it's not just a "left/right" issue but one that fractures into many. The hypothesis by Iain McGillchrist at least demonstrates that the majority of us have the ability to engage both hemispheres. Maybe there's hope if we can learn to recognise the difference in the thinking patterns and control that part of us that is trying to control the environment. I don't know but as per his hypothesis it's not our rational side that will dig our way out. When he made the claim that our rational side is far more prone to delusion it rocked me but once you concider the we can and do rationalise everything it becomes obvious.
I heard a guy discussing pager-rama in terms of it being an alienating form of war. I knew instantly that he was borrowing from Marx on capitalism and division of Labor alienating Man from Society of Man. Use of technology is "cheating". I guess the ideal would be, 100 million Muslim Brotherhood men meet on an open field with 4 million Jewish men, everyone gets one sword, see who wins. That's why the Left hates any kind of science empiricism reason logic evidence and technology that made Western Society stronger than societies that clung to superstitions too much. That's why the CRT narrative or one person's personal offendedness is held as equally important and valid as empirical history or biology.
Yes - that is something we should all strive to avoid. Too often on the right, people throw around words like "RINO" and "neocon" as a way to avoid engaging with the complexities of US foreign policy and America's role on the world stage.
All you have to do is listen to the interview yourself to know that Konstantin is presenting all the facts. The fact that you don't want to hear it (or don't want other people to hear it) is your problem.
@@weikko79 I actually tuned into the interview thinking he would talk about things like what Churchill did in India, but he didn't seem at all concerned about that. Literally his issue with Churchill is the fact that he went to war with Hitler whom he tried to portray as being pro peace and only wanting to invade Russia to fight communism (while completely glossing over why he invaded the other countries he invaded). It actually wasn't a nuanced interview, the upshot of it was basically "Churchill bad, Hitler good".
Many English people treat wwII like it was the beginning of history, but we had heroes before Churchill. Part of remembering that is deconstructing the wwII myth. I think Konstantin's heart is in the right place but he doesn't get this fact because his English roots aren't that deep.
Fellow Australian here. The fact is that democracy never changes what they intend for us. After the SSM plebiscite, Australia was promised laws on religious freedom laws against accepting the rainbow. But liberal ministers crossed the floor to vote with Labor against the bill. And now praying a child suffering from gender dysphoria recovers, carries a ten year jail sentence. Do you remember when Pauline Hanson was jailed on trumped charges because she'd won enough seats to bring about political change? She's never been the same. If you live in Australia and you have a grandparent born in the country you are a statistical minority. So who are the voters politicians represent? When governments import voters ( which Labor is currently doing with Palestinians) how is it still a democracy?
A "ten year jail sentence? I agree things Australia is poorly led and headed in a bad direction, but this is pure hyperbole, or grossly misstated, or a straight up falsehood fabricated to exaggerate a mentality of persecution. Women (e.g. Sal Grover, Katherine Deves), feminists (Holly Lawford Smith, Angie Jones), gay people (the LGB Alliance) and all manner of other journalists and campaigners are actively and aggressively speaking out against the gender industry and, no, none have been criminalized yet.
I’m in Japan right now- No homeless on the streets No graffiti No signs of drug use Pervasive sense of safety No sign of police presence No medical tyranny during c19 Freedom of speech Took my daughter to the eye dr for $40 That’s what I’m comparing the USA to right now.
Japan is also losing it's population and doesn't have to spend much at all on defense because the US does it for them. The US could do a lot if they could cut their overall spending by half.
@@a1b1c184 yes, Japan is losing population. They do not have a relationship with a suffering god. The people here definitely sense a widespread malaise that seems to come from a slowly declining wealth not too different from what I hear in the USA from the working class.
Without any information at all, if you simply look at the level of the emotional response to an interview, it appears that something sacred is being protected. It should make you incredibly suspicious of the motivations behind those responses.
No, I don't think so. It's also not just an interview, I think a good comparison is (or was) being invited on a prominent intellectual talking show (when MSM had a monopoly on information and broadcast power). People argued for days what was said sometimes or someone made f up etc. they also had teams to prepare guests, do damage control, provide nuance etc. (whether you think that's good or wrong, there was a framework). This is just the modern digital landscape. I only saw critique from a couple of people, (as I'm not into the cesspool of Twitter and understand the algorithmic feed will give me that artificial impression) While many responses were based on third-party reporting, clips. Some did watch it and have fair critiques and not just bots. I think persuading the person is actually a more beneficial solution than critiquing him as being …, but that's what you get from going on such a big show. The podcast and internet pundit influencers have all the benefits of reach but take none of the responsibilities and frame it as just a conversation (while also boasting they have an audience 10 time bigger than MSM) they should require some due diligence from the host and guest perspective. This will be the downfall of that whole new industry, sadly, if they don't handle that better or constantly say it's purely entertainment and nothing should be taking seriously or something. The amount of nonsense and idiocracy I've heard from many prominent podcasters, new media is astonishing, it's also mostly criticism rehashing old ideas, overly political, nothing constructive or new. Some do a good job by providing the actual info the guest is talking about or the book the ideas come from, etc. Or they say this will be a silly episode, theirs a lot that can be done to make it more professional or present different viewpoints on the topics. But for now, it's just a s show. You also clearly see that is someone has something to sell, they appear on all or several shows, aka known as doing rounds (so it's a new media influencer/ guest cartel).
As KK said, if you want to look at level of emotional response to an interview that bashed Churchill and painted him as the chief villian of WW2, look at the level of emotional response from TUCKER, when statues were taken down by BLM activists. . You have no problem with that
@@boliusabol822 I don’t feel emotional about that either. The concept of hero worship is fine, but it should also be open to questioning. If people - and by extension the statues of those people - are questioned in an interview, I think that’s healthy.
@@MrClockw3rk It's not "questioning" to portray Churchill as the chief villian of WW2. And I see you make a big thing that some people find some wrong stuff the non-historian said offensive, like it offends you that others are offended. Why don't you just look at the facts instead of getting offended that there was a big amount of offense taken.
@@boliusabol822 I don’t feel offended that people are offended. I’m suggesting that emotionality and defensiveness are usually a signal of something else underneath
When people criticize the postwar narrative, kisin says it's all nonsense and the story is settled. But when people go on his show to criticize the war in Israel, it's all written off as consequences of war. He can't have this both ways.
First off I didn't hear him say that the narrative is settled. I heard him say that coopers points were old hat and had been hashed over already. Basically said this wasn't a new conversation . I am also not understanding the contradiction with the consequences of war. Can you elaborate on what you are trying to say?
Well said - Kuntstantin is a pro American globalist who doesn't like anything that dents his ill conceived narrative. So criticism of Israel or America's disastrous war in Ukraine is a dog whistle to him that triggers his flight/fight mechanism instead of illicitting a rational response.
@@Tolstoy111 He called Cooper a (WWII bad guy) apologist, and criticized Tucker Carlson specifically for platforming him. I'll grant you he's being passive aggressive about it, but the veneer is thin.
@@fancyhitchpin8675 If you platform someone who thinks Hitler was misunderstood and a sensitive soul then you open yourself to..criticism. What are you worried about? Tucker can take it.
@@Tolstoy111 You aren't even trying to understand what Martyr Made is arguing, and if you aren't dealing with the man behind the mustache as a human, you aren't trying to understand history at all. And I'm not worried in the least. As I said, Kisin is failing to cancel, and only boosting at this point. I'm just saying f this guy.
Well, he did say he has the right to have his opinion, but Cooper pretends to have some authority on history. However, he’s just a Joe who has read books that confirm his bias and dishonestly portrays himself as an authority. Cooper has nothing to contribute. He’s a prime example of the Dunning Kruger effect.
Can’t stand him or his weird accent, where did it come from? His parents and his peers I guess but it sounds a mix of 80% SE England, 10% American and 10% something else.
The guy should have never been the center of attention. They were decent in the first period of Triggernometry, when they had "interesting people on their show" asking THEM questions. Then they did their beyond pathetic attempts at comedy, mostly consisting of doing "funny" foreign accents, yeah, i know, and it seems since then, the guy became _so very_ important, a true influencer i suppose, that now he gets asked the questions, he is now the "interesting" people that gets invited everywhere spewing HIS ideas and truth(s). I remember, it was a few weeks or months after the Russians crossed the border into Ukraine, he made a video about it and his claim for expertise was, that he is from there, has family there and speaks the language. The sad comedy attempts were more than enough to steer me away from these two douchebags, but that was the last time i clicked on one of their videos.
Ben, even tho it looks like you've gone over to the crazies I still give you credit for having Konstantin Kisin on for over an hour. He is one of the most intelligent, best informed minds commenting on culture and world affairs today. Takes courage.
Thank you for the conversation gentlemen, though I must say I was disappointed by what Mr. Kissin had to say. I really wanted to hear a reasoned explanation for why he dislikes the "Woke Right." Instead all I got was that he really doesn't like Russia or the Austrian painter. Fair enough, but he didn't seem to have a meaningful critique beyond an obvious desire to control the right, and redefine "the sane right" as generic Obama era liberalism. If our countries are going to progress beyond this pit they're caught in, old ways of thinking like Mr. Kissin's aren't going to be helpful. I can understand discomfort at people breaking the frame we were all raised in, but it is going to have to happen in some fashion for things to improve.
Lacking substance in the accusations from Kisin and Lindsay. I'm more likely to believe Lindsay, and agree he has some legit concerns about some Hegelian right types, but the accusations without much evidence or challenges to debate are highly sus and weak AF. I do not believe Cooper is at all a f_scist, but I humbly remain agnostic - anyone who listens to a few hours of Cooper's work would see the accusations as completely absurd, some edgelord tweets notwithstanding.
Because he thinks "reality" is a discernible thing; facts exist and truth matters. People Like Tucker and Trump (much like Putin) are invested in fundamentally undermining people's ability to discern what the truth is by making them completely distust any institutions that we traditionally go to for factual information and analysis (not necesarily for the same reasons).
Kisin is always impressive as a communicator and even though he dominated this interaction, he was very graceful about it. I'm also grateful to the uploader for sharing this video even though it clearly isn't his best moment. It shows maturity and integrity, which I certainly appreciate.
It was working. It worked for the vast majority of our history. One of the reasons it isn't working now is because it has been acted upon by outside forces, not because of anything inherent. It is as if Yuri Bezmenov colluded with Klaus Schwab, and those fun guys at the WEF, to implement the Cloward-Piven strategy on behalf of enemies that didn't want a hot war.
Whenever i hear the phrase "both the left and the right", i know immediately that im listening to a liberal saying liberal things. The right and left are not the same category of thing. They are not the same but different. This is the fundemental error the "woke center" continuously makes.
They are not "woke center", they are "outcast left". Left wingers who got kicked out of the left, or left them, because they do not support the current thing. But they are still left wing. Their view on law, equality and the state, is still on the left. They only follow laws they like or if they would get caught. And they want equality of outcome, not equal start. And they want to use the laws of the state, to push people into their world view.
Kisin has said many times that he’s basically a liberal. Triggernometry is a show that criticizes “woke” ideology from a left perspective. So what I perceive you saying is that you have never heard of or listened to Kisin before. Which is fine, but don’t act like you’ve made some big discovery.
Hands down one of the best interviews lve listened to in a while! Great Questions and awesome interviewer who listened attentively and responded the way journalism used to be! So refreshing!
It sounds to me that Konstantin is the woke right. Running around on every podcast complaining about one man’s point of view that millions dead in war was a bad, and possibly avoidable outcome. Also that we should think deeper about historical narratives that feed our justifications for every future war.
When my 12 year old father saw the American soldiers walking into Dachau, after a year in Auschwitz and surviving the Death March- you can bet he saw Captain America killing Hitler!
the constant re defining of woke and whos woke and the problems of woke are so tiring. im sick of these discussions. its now just a JOB for these people promoting THEMSELVES to sell shit. theres no answers just regurgitating and ridiculous citing of people within their circle jerk.
The idea that kisin proposes that we cannot compare the current circumstances of my country to the past is incredibly stupid. Why can’t I do that? I can point to actual policies and actions of my government that led to things getting demonstrably worse. Why do I have to compare my countries current situation to that of Russia or China? They are not us.
He didn't say you couldn't compare the present with the past. He said you couldn't go there, in the way that Tucker went to Russia to compare. Watch again and you'll see.
9:05 The woke left having their own particular deconstruction of Churchill has no bearing on alternative critiques, whether they come from the right, left, or center.
Woke deconstruction is disgusting 🤐, it's like saying that Israel is provoking Hexboll👁️👃 because it runs the economy and culture with its brilliant citizens. Hitler💀 is going to turn out to be a saint 👹 of the eco-fascists, it was clear... 🤮
His point is that there are people on the right who, under the fig leaf of "just asking question", are pretending that the truth of the matter either cannot be reasonably ascertained or are disingenuously suggesting that it's very much up for debate, as if there isn't a best evidenced and most reasonably inferred narrative that reasonable people should be able to agree upon. It's smacks of the same post-modern undermining of reality that the far Left has utilised as a political power move.
@@onepartyroule Relativism with bias to remove solid ground from beneath sensible social agreements. Deconstruct to remove meaning. 👉 All to achieve power for groups that, looked closely, do not deserve to rise. 😐
Kisin is lying about what Cooper said. When Cooper was asked what Churchill's motivation was, he gave a very nuanced and hedged answer, suggesting that there are a lot of factors. He mentioned the financiers as one individual thing. But Kisin presents it here as if Cooper says this is THE REASON Churchill did what he did. Simply false. It's hilarious to me that the response to Cooper plays out exactly how he was saying it plays out. You take a nuanced and complex position and try to fit it into a neat and clean box premade for you by the current regime so you can dismiss what he's saying.
@@anonmon6236 yeah basically every leftwing argument relies on collapsing that nuanced history into 1-dimensional litmus tests about whether what you're saying is either: A) more towards H or B) further away from H.
Kisin is a dark character. I find him quite disingenuous. The interview with a "grooming gang" victim where he told her that White people collectivising is a bad thing made me want to vomit. That it is literally the one thing that would have prevented her ordeal, and would prevent future crimes of that nature. And of course, he has a rather different approach to his OWN group collectivising. Not really doing much to break the stereotype, is he?
I have listened to triggernometry since it began, and you sum him up well. Ultimately he only cares about his own career. During covid he never questioned any government response.
@lowandodor1150 Yeah, it's in this interview. Not sure about the exact time, sorry. Looked for a clip but couldn't find one. th-cam.com/video/etpAtC2S0uQ/w-d-xo.htmlsi=4HlZHH6W8gsKy5pk
Collectivism around race IS a bad thing. The situation with grooming gangs was ironically exacerbated BECAUSE of race collectivism (police afraid of offending Muslims) rather than treating this as a problem of culture, which isn’t inherently racial.
I think Kissin is a bit of a douche, but I also think that he's fairly honest and that he's more or less correct in his evaluation of Tucker. Tucker is a rat fink.
You are a liar, you intentionally misinterpreted what Daryl said and claimed that Churchill's Zionist backers were the ONLY reason, when Daryl listed it as potential contributory factor alongside numerous others that he explored.
I’m only halfway through but as tense as this conversation was, this was one of my favorites you’ve ever done and I felt like you this whole conversation
"Draw a picture of the globalists" ... I prefer Whitney Webb's characterization. A relationship between organized crime, government, and the corporate blob (an entanglement of corporations that hold shares in each other) Tech, pharma, finance, defense
Nah, he's conveniently lumping in Cooper with the woke right out of personal prejudice, but it is also true that there is a budding right wing faction that is basically "post-truth" and willing to burn down western civilization just to get revenge against their political opponents. If you contrast this with the sobriety of Yarvin's analyses and his emphasis on making the regime change as clean and bloodless as possible, there is a pretty obvious difference, and it seems unlikely that the "post-truth" and "just wanting to see the world burn" mindsets of the woke right are entirely unrelated to the same mindsets found in the woke left. It is ludicrous of him to classify Cooper with the woke right, but let's not pretend that the broader phenomenon he is describing doesn't exist.
This is exactly the case and his audience have said the same endlessly. As soon as he saw alot of 'I'm not sure we can continue funding/ I feel morally comfortable this foreign war ' He mentioned 'the woke right'. Then when some of his audience suggested the same about Israel he suddenly got filly on board his woke right train. I don't disagree with him on some of these but I think it's a bit...cheap to then invent the woke right.
@@matthewkilbride1669 No. I think he'd go on for a hour twenty of strawmen and appeals to authority which could be accurately boiled down to 'I think they're both dangerous.'
Seeing the comments, he obviously hits a nerve... I just call them Right Wing Tankies, because that's really what they are, but woke right sounds good too. It's horseshoe theory in action, at this point I see little difference between the blue haired weirdos and the weirdos KK calls "woke right". Especially when all of them start to blame the traditional scapegoat of 2000 years, we know they're all just the same
So I looked up the claim that Russia has decriminalized domestic violence. I found articles claiming this, but they only referenced a law on reduced maximum charges for first time offences in cases that did not result in serious bodily harm. Does anyone have more detailed description of that law? If thats all it was, calling that decriminalizng domestic violence seems hyperbolic.
As far as I can tell, it was the rule we typical have in western countries, where the wife is believed if she accuse her husband of violence, even without clear evidence. Basically, in Russia, you only get persecuted for assault, not for assault in marriage as a separate law. And, if it does not count as assault if it happen between strangers, it would not be considered illegal if it happen between couples. These are also laws, we only got in the West, after 2000. So, a claim that "domestic violence was decriminalized", would also claim it was not criminal in most European countries before 2000. I would not want to be a woman in Russian society, but it is not the laws that is the problems. And claiming it is, is dishonest, or a typical left wing view, where they think banning guns would make criminals stop using guns.
@@haraldbredsdorff2699 my female friends and relatives are enjoying living in Russia. So it's kinda ridiculous that you wouldn't want to be a woman in Russia.
I'm a big fan of both and have listened to nearly everything both of these guys have posted. I loved this conversation, because it was mostly not about winning. They showed that 2 reasonable people can disagree and have a reasonable conversation.
Good listening! Benjamin is too polite to cut through completely though. KK's dismissal of Darryl Cooper is (IMHO) a bit early, and a bit more forthright than it needs to be. And his interpretation of the Churchill/bribery/debt issue is a prime example of this. Having watched the TC/DC interview, I'm pretty sure from memory that DC was nowhere near as direct as KK makes out. DC would make a good guest on either BB's show or Triggernometry. Also the claim that to be RW in Europe is illegal deserves a little more interrogation. Frustrating that when KK brings up AfD to make a point that it's not illegal, BB didn't mention (quite possibly didn't know) that there is credible, open discussion amongst high-level German pols and journos about making AfD illegal. It's not a question of whether they want to, but how to do it. Finally - as someone pointed out below - BB's not having watched the TC/DC interview is... lax at best. Good people though, and good discussion overall.
I listened to Darryl Cooper's series on zionism and the founding of modern israel before this controversy. I thought it was a very thorough, balanced and compelling account and in no way did Darryl come across as a nazi apologist. Now people who have never engaged with Darryl's work before, who claim to be pro-discourse and open to new ideas, are throwing the kitchen sink of smear tactics at him and his defenders. It's all very pathetic and reinforces Darryl's point that our culture doesn't see WWII as a real historical event with complex causes and motivations behind it. I believe it is perfectly reasonable to question whether Churchill was actually a good actor and that this does not necessitate a defense of hitler or his ideology.
Well I listened to the interview with Tucker Carlson and it was everything Konstantin is describing only even worse. His depiction of WWII wasn't nuanced at all, it was actually very black and white - Hitler was "the good guy" who wanted peace, only invaded the countries he invaded because he wanted to fight communism (including the ones that weren't communist at the time), only killed millions of people for humanitarian reason (he unironically said that btw, he just phrased it a bit differently) and his only flaw was "not planning the war better". Meanwhile Churchill was the bad guy essentially for going to war against Hitler, which he only did because Zionists were paying him off. This is the summary of what he said in the interview with Tucker Carlson, the fact that he used a lot of flowery language to make it sound more palatable to the useful idiots listening, doesn't change the fact that this is basically what he said.
Framing is everything. The framing on Tucker's podcast was "here is an alternate view of the war which might challenge your assumptions" not "here is the correct view of the war". The fact is most people do not want their assumptions about the war challenged. Where we really justified in siding with the soviets even though the soviets were even more murderous and destructive than the fascists? (a point which Kisin himself has made). Is it really true that peace with Germany was never possible? Would it have been desirable? These are real and difficult questions which merit serious discussion.
@@hologramjosh I think people who feel the need to "challenge" our "assumptions" about WWII are simply looking at it from the POV of people who were born a very long time after it ended and for some reason have difficulty understanding what it was like just from looking at the facts. The fact is that Hitler promised to make peace after invading "just one" country and then proceeded to break that promise and started invading all of Europe. It's not even a question of "justified" or "not justified", the fact is that the average British citizen would have had to have been completely retarded to not understand that they were next on the chopping block if they didn't fight back.
@@hologramjosh YT deleted my reply so here's a shorter version: it doesn't matter who was more murderous, the fact is that Hitler was taking over all of Europe and swiftly approaching the UK. Britain was 100% justified in fighting back.
@@hologramjosh They're not difficult questions if you just read the history. H was a much bigger and more immediate threat. (Sorry for the brief reply, yt keeps deleting the elaborate ones).
I'm glad you were able to have a chat despite the initial disagreement, but I'm still left wondering how to define this "Woke Right" as something other than, "people to my right that I believe should be cancelled"
Was Churchill the chief villain of WWII? That is entirely the question being set out by Darryl Cooper, and for Konstantin to casually assert that this is factually false is revealing his inability to entertain ambiguity and nuance. Cooper’s position was not that Churchill’s actions were measurably more reprehensible than Hitler’s. Rather, he is arguing that the decisions and actions of Churchill precipitated an escalation of atrocities carried out by all participants, including those committed by Hitler. The point being that the outcome of WWII was the worst possible, made so by the decisions taken by Churchill. He was not arguing that Hitler was in any sense the good guy caught up in an unavoidable escalation of malevolence, but that Hitler’s reactionary response was exacerbated and amplified by the provocations that came from Britain. I am by no means an expert on WWII, far from it. But it seems to me that this is an entirely valid proposition to put forward for debate among historians. Unfortunately, Konstantin’s Manichaeism can only tolerate a singular interpretation of the events of history, and of WWII, in particular. His perception is built upon a foundational myth of the rightness (righteousness?) of Churchill over against the irrepressible evil of Hitler. It seems to me, that for that edifice to be challenged in the slightest is to erode his own metaphysical universe and so he has reacted with such ferocity.
"Woke Right" is supposed to be a shock collar term. It is just when the right is no longer parroting the prescribed messaging given to them and DARE to raise an eyebrow in Israel's direction.
It could be viewed that way, or in a way back to you like: “Why is Israel wrong and why are you right?” You’re assuming in your skepticism and stance against Israel that you’re justified in your own opinions, whereas it could all just be subjective. Meaning none of you are right and it’s going to boil down to violence and “might makes”.
Have you ever considered that there are right wing people in Israel. Most Israelis don't accept this blank slate we are all the same nonsense. Most Israelis want more nationalism and not less. Most Israelis think Europeans are stupid for letting in so many Muslims. The Israeli right winger should be friends with the European right winger and the Indian right winger and act against the liberal globalist.
@@JordanX767Why does Israel fund open borders groups and multiculturalism in foreign countries including the US while cracking down on it in their own? Why is pride in someone's history or heritage only acceptable for their group and no others? It's a double standard everyone has noticed and is getting sick of. If they just said "it's fine for everybody" no one would care but they actively undermine it by speaking out of both sides of their mouths. The truth is simple: it weakens people they don't like and strengthens them and they don't want to have to deal with someone else who can stick up for themselves.
@@sillygoose4472hmm. So do you get to say who the one true God is? Seems to me that the conflict in the middle east does not arise from a lack of religion...
Based on his own definition of an "actual historian" as one who "goes into archives", then surely Kisin must consider David Irving to be a WW2 historian worthy of consideration? We can all guess the answer. Kisin, because of his own biases (and ethnic background), would surely find reasons to denounce Irving's credibility because Irving's portrait of Churchill is of an individual far from being worthy of consideration as "one of the greatest heros of Western civilization".
@@Rapterr15 it's always gerrymandering these lines to exclude the people you want to exclude at the moment. Cooper obviously goes to primary sources all the time, in addition to simply reading books written by historians.
@@jesperlykkeberg7438 The problem is that Kissen claim Cooper said Churchill was the villain. So, he is putting words into Coopers mouth that he did not say, so he can brand him as wrong.
@@kiranarise3248but he did say “the”. He didn’t say Churchill was “a villain” he said he was the “chief villain” which would imply that he is the most villainous. He is “THE” villain by that statement
This is truly and sincerely one of the most disingenuous interviews I've ever seen. There was a time when Konstantin had values and intellectual integrity, and that time has passed. The entire thing was filled with half truths, contradictions and downright hypocrisies to cover for the fact that Konstantin believes he is the arbitor of truth and that everyone on the internet reports to him and is required to stay within the box that he has created for them. Benjamin has the patience of a saint.
I don’t know what interview you watched but that certainly isn’t how I’d describe Kisin in this interview at all. Sure, he’s opinionated but then again, who isn’t?
@@ThatReadingGuy28 I watched the one in which some guy demanded to be the arbiter of truth for the internet while simultaneously ignoring evidence he doesn’t like.
Kisen does have a bit of arrogant air but I heard him citing sources and being very polite. I thought this was a beautiful conversation between two genuine men seeking truth. I am completely perplexed by the reactions in the comments section.
Has either this interviewer or the “historian “ who made these claims ever been to the Churchill War Rooms? Churchill and other leaders worked out strategy and ship and troop movements on large tables. Is that what the so - called historian called “playing with toy soldiers “?
Ah, so people who disagree with him on war are now woke... laughable. Perhaps some of us just prefer less people dying and proxy wars seem to cause more of it. Ukraine and Israel can certainly defend their own land.
Yes, Churchill was a bad guy and yes his behavior led to ww2. You don’t starve a ppl who surrender. Winston Churchill strongly advocated for maintaining a naval blockade against Germany even after the surrender in World War I, believing it was crucial to prevent Germany from recovering too quickly and to ensure the Allies' dominance at the peace negotiations; he argued that continuing the blockade would put pressure on Germany to accept harsh peace terms by limiting their access to vital supplies.
Na, Kissen is left wing. And their is a easy way to spot it. Claiming Hitler to be right wing. Anyone who does that, either have not looked into his policies and compared them to others, or does it, because they do not want Hitler to be on their left wing side.
That's what I said to myself when I saw the title 😂 I'm not sure anymore though what is left and what is right wing, but he is still defending the establishment even though the woke agenda comes from the establishment. The establishment can still convince him to go to war. Benjamin is also still defending questionable things, like autogynephiles. He is looking at the trans issue from a male perspective and will still consider women to be an issue if they raise issues with genspect in regards to safeguarding. I don't like either of these guys much anymore. They pretend to be open to discussion, but they aren't really.
@@mirageprincess2768 "The Establishment" is a "Thought terminating cliché " Once you hear those words our mind is already make up before a bebate about it can happen. Let me ask you this, is KK getting many clicks and likes from this? He is taking a big risk calling the right Woke. He is saying something that no else dares say. Whether these men are open to debate or not is not important. The fact they are talking about something much needed and very much relevant is.
I see the point. I'm a staunch Yarvinian and was very curious to see whether I'd be lumped in with the woke right, but it seems like the two defining characteristics of the woke right are: 1. they barely believe in objective truth and have little interest in making rigorous determinations about whether something is factual or not 2. they are willing to burn down everything just to defeat their ideological opponents, even if it leads to boundless misery and the deaths of millions Yarvin on the other hand may be even more radical than most members of the woke right, but he wants the changes to be made with surgical precision and to cause minimum disruption to commerce, infrastructure, etc. I was quite drawn to the term "barbarian right" but I suppose it is actually a kind of subfaction of the woke right.
When I used to work for the Internationl Lesbian and Gay Association, I corresponded (by letter at that time) with a schoolteacher who worked in southeast Ukraine. Armed with a Ukrainian dictionary and a rather basic grammar of the language, I wrote to him in by very bestest Ukrainian. I received a reply, mostly in Russian, explaining that neither he, any of his family, any of his neighbours, or any of the children he taught, actually spoke Ukrainian. That was about the time when the Kiev (or Kyiv, if you prefer) government was trying to impose the Ukrainian language on the entire country. However extreme you may find Russia's response, it cannot seriously be argued that western Ukraine played no part in fueling resentment among Ukraine's (very large) Russian-speaking minority. The comedian (his real former profession, not my disparagement) who is now President of Ukraine himself has Russian as his native language.
Please do. He's been testing plenty of people's patience and I don't have the liver to drink through this. Plus it'll be funny. He's been going downhill for a while now.
@@publicanimal. But the right is pretty large with numerous belief systems that are antagonistic towards each other. The anti-J issue is a bit troubling
@@brianmeen2158 You can take issue with that all you want, but Konstantin needs to account for why he feels that ethno-nationalism is acceptable for the J but considers it "woke" when it's adopted by Westerners.
I'd have been happy just to listen to Konstantin the whole time and not have to watch Benjamin screwing up his I'm-trying-to-get-my-head-round-this face. Konstantin was clarity personified while Benjamin was murk, uncertainty and confusion incarnate. He even seemed confused about what he himself believes. Halfway through it became clear to him that he hadn't even watched the video around which this whole discussion revolved, which suggests a complacency that he might have got away with someone as vague as himself, and probably has done in the past. And all the time Konstantin remains courteous. Konstantin A + Benjamin D -
First time watching Boyce for me, so I just assumed at the beginning of the interview he was just playing devil's advocate and that was his thing. 40+ minutes in, I'm now very confused as to what his goals with this were and what he was ultimately trying to accomplish. I think your hypothesis of him not being clear on what he believes about the issues discussed here is very apt.
I almost had to pinch myself when I discovered the man who initiated the interview didn’t fucking bother to watch the source material he wanted to discuss. I don’t know who this guy Boyce is but boy, does he look stupid and childish. Astounding level of unpreparedness. Every silly podcaster now fancies themselves a journalist, just like millions with iPhones in hand think themselves as equal to professional photographers.
Kisin made a good point about how when the woke left vilifies our heroes, it’s laughable and cringe, but when the woke right do it, it’s laudable and based
No you're just demonstrating Cooper's point. Churchill (and WW2) is a sort of foundational myth for you in the way that the founding fathers would be for other people. That's literally the point he's making.
You are making Cooper's point because you are implicitly acknowledging that some people are treating WW2 and Churchill as a foundational myth in the way others see the founding fathers as foundational myth/heroes.
You are making Cooper's point because you are implicitly acknowledging that some people are treating WW2 and Churchill as a foundational myth in the way others see the founding fathers as foundational myth/heroes.
@@unknownknowable But that historian wasn't criticising Churchill for "not being right wing enough", he was labelling Churchill as the chief villian of WW2. KK is saying that's wrong, as are other claims that guest of tucker's made, as KK noted. And KK had Neil Ferguson on to discuss the subject too.
I agree with much of what KK said, but he really needs to watch Academic Agent's "Demoralization" video to better understand what BB was saying right at the end. And while I have a lot of problems with cooper/carlson, it is a useful hyperbole to say that right wing thought has been "made illegal", it certainly has here in Canada
Kisin says that, for him, wokeism stands for absence of truth and that’s why he calls Darryl woke. However, Darryl doesn’t say that there’s no truth, on the contrary, he claims there is truth, but it’s different to the current narrative around wwii. Kisin also stated that Darryl said a bunch of lies, but didn’t present a single lie. The opinion about who was the “greatest villain”, something that Darryl said was a hyperbole, is just that - an opinion. It’s neither true or false since it’s not a fact, but a judgement.
I think the point is that there's ample historical discussion of this in the actual history books, with the strongest account still being the one that *is* generally accepted. It's not illegal (hyperbole), so much as illiterate. And illiteracy propagated on mass scale is dangerous. Cooper isn't being lambasted for making a compelling counter-case, but for being legitimized when he's ultracrepidarian. That's what I think KK is saying.
@bilikfinke9197 dude it's literally illegal to question certain points of WW 2 in some European countries. And no there isn't ample discussion as this controversy illustrates. Cooper whether factual or not, poked a sacred cow and that's the reaction by most people. Only the Left gets to dig this deep
Konstatin is right on virtually everything he says here. The term "Woke" is supposed to mean "awakened (to social injustice)" but was first used by somone unfamiliar with the English language who used "woke" out of ignorance. It implies that becoming aware of differences between individuals, demographics, ethnic, culturrs, nationalities, wellbeing, wealth or geography l justifies outrage, vocalised or enacted as protest, violence or some form of disruptive action. Which it doesn't. Though rather less likely to happen on the political right (due to tolerance and protection of individual rights rather than identity politics and hate), it can happen that the outrageous actions of the woke left are vilified by the right, thus becoming the "woke right". Wouldn't it be nice if everyone just calmed down and focused on their individual contributions to society rather than criticising others?
Benjamin has done so many fine interviews. It was a wide ranging discussion. Konstantine lives in the UK. He is not a US voter. Particularly before Presidential elections, Republican supporters band together and may see even those who are enablers of fascism as allies. Democrats may see even ultra left hardline Marzists as allies. Freedom in the US seems to allow almost all political shades. Most of the world may seem very far from the US. The US has given very considerable support to Ukraine for which immense gratitude is appropriate. There are many Ukrainians in the US many of whom are US voters. The US continues to support european countries. It has a long history of doing so. The world will have to wait till January to experience the policies of the next President. Most of the world are not US voters. I agree with most of what Konstantin said.
Correction the US support is to Western Ukraine it is to the detriment of Eastern Ukraine and as with the US attack on Europe's Noordstream pipeline the only country that has benefitted from the so called US support is the US!
I have high respect for Konstantin but this stance along with his views on Pearl hosting Nick F, make me think he's not a true free speech advocate. If you believe Churchill was an angel and Hitler was a demon then get a grip. They were people, that's it.
His views were that Pearl should have challenged NF's views. That's not anti free speech, genius. And the discussion wasn't whether churchill was an angel .. It was with tucker's guest claiming that Churchill was the chief villian of WW2.
I don't think you understand free speech. Just because you get to say whatever you want, does not mean people cannot respond to what you say however they want.
@@corriemooney9812 He is trying to objectively look at the both sides. The phenomenon is real and I’m glad someone was able to understand it and articulate it. I'd rather follow the truth than popular people no matter how good they seem.
@@amorino7776 No hes not lmao. You can hear him get audibly upset at the idea at Churchill being called a villain, which he incorrectly interprets as downplaying the mass murder of his ethnicity. He is 100% embedded into the ruling ideology, which you will call "the center" because all critiques of it have to be placed outside it. It is the center because it is the center.
I love Churchill. I couldn’t care less if he played with toy soldiers. And the assertion that he was compromised by financial issues isn’t a third rail idea. It merits discussion . Why not? What is Kisin afraid of? Why is he so adamant that these ideas not be explored?
Maybe it's because of the people asking the question and their motives? Maybe it's that we live in an age where nobody knows what to believe and a lie circles the globe thrice before the truth catches up. Maybe because the UK is hanging on by a thread and a lot of that strength left to us is how we see ourselves in the perspective of WW2 and that we stood alone against evil for 2 years and held the line with our blood, treasure and empire until we could gather strength and allies for the push back and destruction of fascism in Europe. We sacrificed a lot for a point of principle. We could have given up. We could have done what Darrell said and accepted Hitlers poison chalice but we said NO. And that bravery to do that came from Churchill. He was the first one to step forward with courage and the rest of the country and empire followed him. He was a great man. Despite his flaws.
Great discussion Benjamin. I love to see respectful and productive discourse. You are the master of emapthic conversation and I try to emulate you in that. I hope triggernometry invites you on their podcast to interview you on your work with gender. I would love to watch that.
I’m in a very similar spot as Benjamin. Quite confused on a few big issues and def notice the anti-Jewish and anti-woman rhetoric on the right. That needs to be dialed down
@@brianmeen2158 I don't care for the term woke right but there is definitely a retrograde flank. Less concerned with what can be done to bring this country back from the brink and more concerned with its petty grievances and hatred of other.
Intersting debate. And I agree more with Konstantin Kisin, though he is wrong about Ukraine. Ukraine and Poland and other countries still use vast amounts of Soviet weapons, And surrendering Crimea and Donbas will buy Ukraine and the West absolutely nothing except more grief. Let Ukraine win or expect American troops to fight in Poland or Germany. As for Churchill, he declared he would never forgive the Israelis for executing British soldiers before the 1948 war.
You're a class act, Mr. Boyce. Kisin is atrocious though. I wish you had had a bit more background on the interview and in WW2. Kisin did steamroll you and had you had a bit more background you would have been able to push back
So I'm here for Konstantin, but oh God this is hard to listen to. The guy who is the presenter is so uninformed and does not have ALL THE FACTS that it baffels me how he can have an opinion on a ham sandwich, let alone any complex political issue.
30 minutes in and surprised I still haven't heard the magic words uttered: the Enlightenment. What Konstantin identifies as "woke," across partisan lines, isn't a critique of the West in the broadest historical sense but more precisely a critique of the Enlightenment -- of human beings understood as rational, truth-seeking actors; of legitimate authority produced only through the free consent of such rational, truth-seeking actors. For there are various tendencies within "the West," itself, that predate and indeed oppose the claims of the Enlightenment specifically; this leads to a curious bind for self-professed conservatives: some conservatives are looking to conserve the insights *of* the Enlightenment (in the face of modern skepticism); some conservatives, however, are looking to conserve what came *before* the Enlightenment.
To consider Konstantin Kisin as someone from the "traditional right" is to be naive. From what I know of him, although he is not a progressive, he has positions in common with those of many people on the "traditional right" but in the end of the day its essence and fundamental position is liberal.
Part of the problem is that nobody knows what 'liberal' even means anymore. Traditional English liberalism? French style? New American liberalism?
A fundamental problem with having thought processes that are more 'liberal' I.e. 'live and let live' is that nobody on the liberal side of things thinks its their responsibility to control their crazies. Konstantin is one of very few voices of 'classic English liberalism' that actually raises his voice and calls out when the liberals get crazy, which they manifestly have of late. That's why people listen to what he says.
Left and right don't exist
Thats like saying there is no difference between agreeing and disagreeing are the same.@spencerantoniomarlen-starr3069
Examples?
@@scoon2117 What I mean is that Konstatin is more in the center/left. He agrees with some "right" positions in the cultural and social side, simply due to common sense that is currently missing on the "left" and because he suffered .
He criticizes the woke as something that harmed him professionally in the past as comedian and realized that his criticism has helped him professionally in the present.
It won't be long before he starts commenting and criticizing the phantom threat of the "nationalist-christian" movement on the rise...
I can't stand this guy anymore. He never gets to the point. He wants white people to play liberalism while the rest, him included, is playing tribalism. It's over now.
yep, hes full of it, hes a lib / leans left = waste of our time.
I still like him but I am disgusted by his disregard of common sense concerns about national sovereignty and White replacement. Classical liberalism and traditional conservative principles are great but they won't matter when we've been over-run by savages.
Because white people are never tribal, except they are as much as anyone else.
@@MargaretOConnorFlanigan exactly
what guy you talking about ? I hope you dont mean BB, he is still one of the few out there that seems rational to me... If you mean Kisin, im with you 100%.
I love Benjamin, but he seems woefully in over his head here. Not watching Carlson's interview of Cooper makes a genuine back and forth impossible. For a guy who obviously knows how to put in the work, it's a shocking screw up.
Agreed.
It's one thing not to read a 500-page book in advance.
It's quite another thing to not bother watching a video.
*Reply to:* _"I love Benjamin, but he seems woefully in over his head here. Not watching Carlson's interview of Cooper makes a genuine back and forth impossible. For a guy who obviously knows how to put in the work, it's a shocking screw up."_
It’s on me. I watched a couple of Cooper’s response episodes and interviews, then started working through Fear and Loathing … now watching the Tucker interview and I still have a more positive view of Cooper than Kisin does.
All that said, I feel embarrassed with my lack of preparation here.
Not watching the interview is a bomb fuckup but even things outside of the original topic like 19:02 bothered me, a lot of studying history is just reading historians. That's whose writing you dig into archives for. It's not all 100% of it but a big lot of it.
Many times people who write things down haven't been there when they happened or even lived at the same time. Historians should go through multiple such writers and form a conclusion that can use multiple other sources like archaeological evidence or something.
Even the off topic is wack Benjamin gives on what isn't anyones to give on
@@BenjaminABoyce - I can't say enough how much I respect the work you do and how you approach it. Substance, a generous spirit and good faith are a rare combination these days, especially online. I put Konstantin in the same category, and was eager for the exchange. And there was a lot of good stuff in it. And so I frankly feel a bit badly for making a negative comment, especially when I rarely comment at all. Don't let the bastards (like me) get you down. Thanks for putting yourself out there. It's a lot harder than taking pot shots from the gallery. 🙂
Well, even if he watched the interview 40 times. There are so many lies in that interview. Lies that can be spotted and proved. Piers Morgan talked about that (I will give you a link). Let me name just the biggest lie. They blame Churchill for the escalation of the war, while he was not a prime minister. So he couldn't have provoked Hilter even if he had wanted to. It is so stupid. How can any not see that? th-cam.com/video/53x0FECym2M/w-d-xo.html
Nobody tell Kisin that Yarvin's WWII take is very similar to Cooper's.
Kissen have no problem with Yarvin's take. He does not even really care about Coopers.
But he use it, because Cooper in the past have pointed out how zionism have caused so much problems for Israel and the middle east. Because the zionists are not willing to make deals that could bring peace.
So he try to use this to attack Cooper so he will no longer speak about zionism (that is not the same as jews).
“Hitler Lives” is wild.
Is it now, oh wow, I'm so shocked🙄
@@readwatchlisten2863Curtis Yarvin has probably read more primary source historical documentation than anyone else alive today
@@Solupschizo whats primary source documentation
Iron law of woke projection.
Im starting to understand why critique of the left from within a liberal framework can never really matter. These IDW types are polishing brass on the titanic.
So who on the right do you fully support then? I just don’t think anyone has the answer as for what practical steps to take to fix the problems we now see. Kisin said we need to vote the right people in but who are these saviors that we can put our faith in..? I’m just not seeing that person anywhere in the political scene
@@brianmeen2158 this question, I believe it's in good faith so I'll try to answer it in good faith. I think you need to step outside of the framework. Look at the words you are using. Fixing the problem in practical steps. Voting the right person in. Your thinking presupposes so much. You probably don't see it that way, and I'm not saying you are wrong even. But you do need to realize that these things are actually not a neutral starting point, and need justification to be asserted.
We don't need a leader we need a better system. The right people to vote in are us, the actual people who give a sh!t
@@brianmeen2158 One could start with Pat Buchanan, the man behind the revolt against the neo-con establishment.
A good discussion but Benjamin not seeing the Tucker interview with Cooper obviously dinged this discussion. Maybe Benjamin could watch it and post a quick observation about it.
Wokeness means that instead of being able to discuss a complex topic you lash out and start name calling
Yes. It's important to quantity it in as precise way as you can.
It's difficult though. Your clarification tends to mirror the divided brain perceptions laid out by Iain McGillchrist in his book "The Master and his Emissary".
Jordan Peterson makes an interesting case with regards to belief systems particularly in the religious domain that without an overarching "narrative" of some kind civilisation fractures into a shambles of differing narratives forcing infinite value systems.
So it may be that it's not just a "left/right" issue but one that fractures into many.
The hypothesis by Iain McGillchrist at least demonstrates that the majority of us have the ability to engage both hemispheres.
Maybe there's hope if we can learn to recognise the difference in the thinking patterns and control that part of us that is trying to control the environment.
I don't know but as per his hypothesis it's not our rational side that will dig our way out.
When he made the claim that our rational side is far more prone to delusion it rocked me but once you concider the we can and do rationalise everything it becomes obvious.
I heard a guy discussing pager-rama in terms of it being an alienating form of war. I knew instantly that he was borrowing from Marx on capitalism and division of Labor alienating Man from Society of Man. Use of technology is "cheating".
I guess the ideal would be, 100 million Muslim Brotherhood men meet on an open field with 4 million Jewish men, everyone gets one sword, see who wins.
That's why the Left hates any kind of science empiricism reason logic evidence and technology that made Western Society stronger than societies that clung to superstitions too much.
That's why the CRT narrative or one person's personal offendedness is held as equally important and valid as empirical history or biology.
Wrong. You jist describe one single of their many behaviors.
Yes - that is something we should all strive to avoid. Too often on the right, people throw around words like "RINO" and "neocon" as a way to avoid engaging with the complexities of US foreign policy and America's role on the world stage.
It's not complex. And it's not name calling lol.
Luckily Konstantin has all the facts and he makes sure you know he will tell you all the facts and cares about the facts. A very factual guy, he is.
He takes the facts that serve his purpose and omits all the rest.
I particularly enjoyed how he dismissed the fact about "Prime Minister Churchill playing with toy soldiers" with all those facts.
All you have to do is listen to the interview yourself to know that Konstantin is presenting all the facts. The fact that you don't want to hear it (or don't want other people to hear it) is your problem.
@@SecondVelcory He considers it a "fact" that there was only one villain in WWII. That tells you pretty much all you need to know about the guy.
@@weikko79 I actually tuned into the interview thinking he would talk about things like what Churchill did in India, but he didn't seem at all concerned about that. Literally his issue with Churchill is the fact that he went to war with Hitler whom he tried to portray as being pro peace and only wanting to invade Russia to fight communism (while completely glossing over why he invaded the other countries he invaded). It actually wasn't a nuanced interview, the upshot of it was basically "Churchill bad, Hitler good".
Many English people treat wwII like it was the beginning of history, but we had heroes before Churchill. Part of remembering that is deconstructing the wwII myth. I think Konstantin's heart is in the right place but he doesn't get this fact because his English roots aren't that deep.
Fellow Australian here. The fact is that democracy never changes what they intend for us. After the SSM plebiscite, Australia was promised laws on religious freedom laws against accepting the rainbow. But liberal ministers crossed the floor to vote with Labor against the bill. And now praying a child suffering from gender dysphoria recovers, carries a ten year jail sentence.
Do you remember when Pauline Hanson was jailed on trumped charges because she'd won enough seats to bring about political change? She's never been the same.
If you live in Australia and you have a grandparent born in the country you are a statistical minority. So who are the voters politicians represent? When governments import voters ( which Labor is currently doing with Palestinians) how is it still a democracy?
A "ten year jail sentence? I agree things Australia is poorly led and headed in a bad direction, but this is pure hyperbole, or grossly misstated, or a straight up falsehood fabricated to exaggerate a mentality of persecution. Women (e.g. Sal Grover, Katherine Deves), feminists (Holly Lawford Smith, Angie Jones), gay people (the LGB Alliance) and all manner of other journalists and campaigners are actively and aggressively speaking out against the gender industry and, no, none have been criminalized yet.
Because they realized the issue isn't the rainbow...
@@pizzaiq They knew it was another step towards weakening the nation.
I’m in Japan right now-
No homeless on the streets
No graffiti
No signs of drug use
Pervasive sense of safety
No sign of police presence
No medical tyranny during c19
Freedom of speech
Took my daughter to the eye dr for $40
That’s what I’m comparing the USA to right now.
And you didn't even mention better-looking women!
Japan is also losing it's population and doesn't have to spend much at all on defense because the US does it for them. The US could do a lot if they could cut their overall spending by half.
The wokes say that Japan is "totalitarianism", it is clear 😂 that the wokes do not have mirrors... ❤ Love LOVE Japan 🤩
@@chesscomsupport8689 twenty years ago I noticed that 👍 married one of those beautiful ladies and started a family
@@a1b1c184 yes, Japan is losing population. They do not have a relationship with a suffering god.
The people here definitely sense a widespread malaise that seems to come from a slowly declining wealth not too different from what I hear in the USA from the working class.
Without any information at all, if you simply look at the level of the emotional response to an interview, it appears that something sacred is being protected. It should make you incredibly suspicious of the motivations behind those responses.
No, I don't think so. It's also not just an interview, I think a good comparison is (or was) being invited on a prominent intellectual talking show (when MSM had a monopoly on information and broadcast power). People argued for days what was said sometimes or someone made f up etc. they also had teams to prepare guests, do damage control, provide nuance etc. (whether you think that's good or wrong, there was a framework). This is just the modern digital landscape. I only saw critique from a couple of people, (as I'm not into the cesspool of Twitter and understand the algorithmic feed will give me that artificial impression) While many responses were based on third-party reporting, clips. Some did watch it and have fair critiques and not just bots. I think persuading the person is actually a more beneficial solution than critiquing him as being …, but that's what you get from going on such a big show.
The podcast and internet pundit influencers have all the benefits of reach but take none of the responsibilities and frame it as just a conversation (while also boasting they have an audience 10 time bigger than MSM) they should require some due diligence from the host and guest perspective. This will be the downfall of that whole new industry, sadly, if they don't handle that better or constantly say it's purely entertainment and nothing should be taking seriously or something.
The amount of nonsense and idiocracy I've heard from many prominent podcasters, new media is astonishing, it's also mostly criticism rehashing old ideas, overly political, nothing constructive or new. Some do a good job by providing the actual info the guest is talking about or the book the ideas come from, etc. Or they say this will be a silly episode, theirs a lot that can be done to make it more professional or present different viewpoints on the topics. But for now, it's just a s show. You also clearly see that is someone has something to sell, they appear on all or several shows, aka known as doing rounds (so it's a new media influencer/ guest cartel).
As KK said, if you want to look at level of emotional response to an interview that bashed Churchill and painted him as the chief villian of WW2, look at the level of emotional response from TUCKER, when statues were taken down by BLM activists. . You have no problem with that
@@boliusabol822 I don’t feel emotional about that either. The concept of hero worship is fine, but it should also be open to questioning. If people - and by extension the statues of those people - are questioned in an interview, I think that’s healthy.
@@MrClockw3rk It's not "questioning" to portray Churchill as the chief villian of WW2. And I see you make a big thing that some people find some wrong stuff the non-historian said offensive, like it offends you that others are offended. Why don't you just look at the facts instead of getting offended that there was a big amount of offense taken.
@@boliusabol822 I don’t feel offended that people are offended. I’m suggesting that emotionality and defensiveness are usually a signal of something else underneath
When people criticize the postwar narrative, kisin says it's all nonsense and the story is settled. But when people go on his show to criticize the war in Israel, it's all written off as consequences of war. He can't have this both ways.
Apparently he’s a hypocritical tool and grifter
Kisin
First off I didn't hear him say that the narrative is settled. I heard him say that coopers points were old hat and had been hashed over already. Basically said this wasn't a new conversation .
I am also not understanding the contradiction with the consequences of war. Can you elaborate on what you are trying to say?
@@Didleeios88 "i hate jews"
that's all he's trying to say.
Well said - Kuntstantin is a pro American globalist who doesn't like anything that dents his ill conceived narrative. So criticism of Israel or America's disastrous war in Ukraine is a dog whistle to him that triggers his flight/fight mechanism instead of illicitting a rational response.
Iron law of woke projection.
Nattering "woke right" as he tries, and fails, to cancel Darryl Cooper.
We're counting on you Benjamin.
@@fancyhitchpin8675calling someone a fool isn’t trying to cancel them
@@Tolstoy111 He called Cooper a (WWII bad guy) apologist, and criticized Tucker Carlson specifically for platforming him. I'll grant you he's being passive aggressive about it, but the veneer is thin.
@@fancyhitchpin8675 If you platform someone who thinks Hitler was misunderstood and a sensitive soul then you open yourself to..criticism. What are you worried about? Tucker can take it.
@@Tolstoy111 You aren't even trying to understand what Martyr Made is arguing, and if you aren't dealing with the man behind the mustache as a human, you aren't trying to understand history at all.
And I'm not worried in the least. As I said, Kisin is failing to cancel, and only boosting at this point. I'm just saying f this guy.
Should be a good conversation considering Kisin is pretty woke for a supposed right-winger.
For someone as far to left as you are, l guess it shouldn't surprise that you feel you can jest in that way
@@Rat-PoisonDaughterofaSuicide Hilarious. Kisin is a centrist.
@Vingul
The actual funny part is that you think ur right-wing..you should feel at home here cos liberal Ben thinks you are as well
@@Vingulthat’s hilarious!
He's a European right winger, that puts his politics to the left of Hilary Clinton. Dudes never actually met a conservative.
This guy literally opened with “amateur historian” and then performed the appeal to authority fallacy for the duration of the conversation.
Well, he did say he has the right to have his opinion, but Cooper pretends to have some authority on history. However, he’s just a Joe who has read books that confirm his bias and dishonestly portrays himself as an authority. Cooper has nothing to contribute. He’s a prime example of the Dunning Kruger effect.
His name is Kisin and he is a j*w
"This guy" is 100% right. And Boyce is way in over his head being that Kisin is an intellectual powerhouse.
My interest in what Kisin has to say has come to an end.
It really never began
Exactly. He's become what he started off opposing.
I've listened to him for years. He only cares about himself
Can’t stand him or his weird accent, where did it come from? His parents and his peers I guess but it sounds a mix of 80% SE England, 10% American and 10% something else.
The guy should have never been the center of attention. They were decent in the first period of Triggernometry, when they had "interesting people on their show" asking THEM questions. Then they did their beyond pathetic attempts at comedy, mostly consisting of doing "funny" foreign accents, yeah, i know, and it seems since then, the guy became _so very_ important, a true influencer i suppose, that now he gets asked the questions, he is now the "interesting" people that gets invited everywhere spewing HIS ideas and truth(s).
I remember, it was a few weeks or months after the Russians crossed the border into Ukraine, he made a video about it and his claim for expertise was, that he is from there, has family there and speaks the language.
The sad comedy attempts were more than enough to steer me away from these two douchebags, but that was the last time i clicked on one of their videos.
Ben, even tho it looks like you've gone over to the crazies I still give you credit for having Konstantin Kisin on for over an hour. He is one of the most intelligent, best informed minds commenting on culture and world affairs today. Takes courage.
Thank you for the conversation gentlemen, though I must say I was disappointed by what Mr. Kissin had to say. I really wanted to hear a reasoned explanation for why he dislikes the "Woke Right." Instead all I got was that he really doesn't like Russia or the Austrian painter. Fair enough, but he didn't seem to have a meaningful critique beyond an obvious desire to control the right, and redefine "the sane right" as generic Obama era liberalism.
If our countries are going to progress beyond this pit they're caught in, old ways of thinking like Mr. Kissin's aren't going to be helpful. I can understand discomfort at people breaking the frame we were all raised in, but it is going to have to happen in some fashion for things to improve.
Lacking substance in the accusations from Kisin and Lindsay. I'm more likely to believe Lindsay, and agree he has some legit concerns about some Hegelian right types, but the accusations without much evidence or challenges to debate are highly sus and weak AF. I do not believe Cooper is at all a f_scist, but I humbly remain agnostic - anyone who listens to a few hours of Cooper's work would see the accusations as completely absurd, some edgelord tweets notwithstanding.
Because he thinks "reality" is a discernible thing; facts exist and truth matters. People Like Tucker and Trump (much like Putin) are invested in fundamentally undermining people's ability to discern what the truth is by making them completely distust any institutions that we traditionally go to for factual information and analysis (not necesarily for the same reasons).
KK only cares about KK.
That's because Konstantin IS the Woke Right.
@@zachtollen1031 Why is he? Because he thinks racism exists?
Kisin is always impressive as a communicator and even though he dominated this interaction, he was very graceful about it. I'm also grateful to the uploader for sharing this video even though it clearly isn't his best moment. It shows maturity and integrity, which I certainly appreciate.
Agree, and am not surprised. Benjamin strikes me as someone who is genuinely curious, sincere and also humble. Its honestly so refreshing.
Seems that people just don't like Kisin's manner. His points are reasonable and open to refutation.
It was working. It worked for the vast majority of our history. One of the reasons it isn't working now is because it has been acted upon by outside forces, not because of anything inherent. It is as if Yuri Bezmenov colluded with Klaus Schwab, and those fun guys at the WEF, to implement the Cloward-Piven strategy on behalf of enemies that didn't want a hot war.
Whenever i hear the phrase "both the left and the right", i know immediately that im listening to a liberal saying liberal things. The right and left are not the same category of thing. They are not the same but different. This is the fundemental error the "woke center" continuously makes.
They are not "woke center", they are "outcast left".
Left wingers who got kicked out of the left, or left them,
because they do not support the current thing.
But they are still left wing. Their view on law, equality and the state, is still on the left.
They only follow laws they like or if they would get caught.
And they want equality of outcome, not equal start.
And they want to use the laws of the state, to push people into their world view.
Kisin has said many times that he’s basically a liberal. Triggernometry is a show that criticizes “woke” ideology from a left perspective. So what I perceive you saying is that you have never heard of or listened to Kisin before. Which is fine, but don’t act like you’ve made some big discovery.
@@goodgrief888 he's arguing for centrism dipshit
Hands down one of the best interviews lve listened to in a while! Great Questions and awesome interviewer who listened attentively and responded the way journalism used to be!
So refreshing!
It sounds to me that Konstantin is the woke right. Running around on every podcast complaining about one man’s point of view that millions dead in war was a bad, and possibly avoidable outcome. Also that we should think deeper about historical narratives that feed our justifications for every future war.
When my 12 year old father saw the American soldiers walking into Dachau, after a year in Auschwitz and surviving the Death March- you can bet he saw Captain America killing Hitler!
the constant re defining of woke and whos woke and the problems of woke are so tiring. im sick of these discussions. its now just a JOB for these people promoting THEMSELVES to sell shit.
theres no answers just regurgitating and ridiculous citing of people within their circle jerk.
From these people's mouths 'woke' is just a woke label for someone who says something they don't like.
The idea that kisin proposes that we cannot compare the current circumstances of my country to the past is incredibly stupid. Why can’t I do that? I can point to actual policies and actions of my government that led to things getting demonstrably worse. Why do I have to compare my countries current situation to that of Russia or China? They are not us.
He didn't say you couldn't compare the present with the past. He said you couldn't go there, in the way that Tucker went to Russia to compare. Watch again and you'll see.
9:05 The woke left having their own particular deconstruction of Churchill has no bearing on alternative critiques, whether they come from the right, left, or center.
Woke deconstruction is disgusting 🤐, it's like saying that Israel is provoking Hexboll👁️👃 because it runs the economy and culture with its brilliant citizens. Hitler💀 is going to turn out to be a saint 👹 of the eco-fascists, it was clear... 🤮
His point is that there are people on the right who, under the fig leaf of "just asking question", are pretending that the truth of the matter either cannot be reasonably ascertained or are disingenuously suggesting that it's very much up for debate, as if there isn't a best evidenced and most reasonably inferred narrative that reasonable people should be able to agree upon. It's smacks of the same post-modern undermining of reality that the far Left has utilised as a political power move.
@@onepartyroule Relativism with bias to remove solid ground from beneath sensible social agreements. Deconstruct to remove meaning. 👉 All to achieve power for groups that, looked closely, do not deserve to rise. 😐
@@OpenHLZFocus I don't disagree with anything you've said.
@@OpenHLZFocusDo you not see you just made the woke power/truth argument?
Kisin is lying about what Cooper said. When Cooper was asked what Churchill's motivation was, he gave a very nuanced and hedged answer, suggesting that there are a lot of factors. He mentioned the financiers as one individual thing. But Kisin presents it here as if Cooper says this is THE REASON Churchill did what he did. Simply false.
It's hilarious to me that the response to Cooper plays out exactly how he was saying it plays out. You take a nuanced and complex position and try to fit it into a neat and clean box premade for you by the current regime so you can dismiss what he's saying.
Yes, and for Kisin to simplify the whole story saying “there can only be one villain” - that is so supremely juvenile and intellectually dishonest
There's a lot riding on the narrative isn't there?
@@anonmon6236 yeah basically every leftwing argument relies on collapsing that nuanced history into 1-dimensional litmus tests about whether what you're saying is either: A) more towards H or B) further away from H.
That's what woke do... he's just projecting his own wokeness on to someone else.
@@anonmon6236Yes the left narrative needs fascism
Tucker doesn't generally interrogate his guests.
No but he laughs at their faces when they’re being ridiculous
This was such an amazingly masterful interview by Boyce that I have to subscribe to him
“Anything to the left/right of my opinions is woke”.
Is "Antisemitic Right" more to the point? You seem to only mean that
Well, yeah. Except that “nationalistic pride and tribal preferences”=“antisemitic”, by their reckoning. So…🤷🏻
@@georgecisneros5281 Anything that's good for Europeans anywhere on earth is bad for the likes of Kisin.
@Vingul That's laughable
@@austinhageman6148 It really would be if it wasn't so sinister.
His entire shtick is trying to influence the right-wing for the benefit of Jews and Israel. There is little further depth to his character.
Kisin is a dark character. I find him quite disingenuous. The interview with a "grooming gang" victim where he told her that White people collectivising is a bad thing made me want to vomit. That it is literally the one thing that would have prevented her ordeal, and would prevent future crimes of that nature. And of course, he has a rather different approach to his OWN group collectivising.
Not really doing much to break the stereotype, is he?
I have listened to triggernometry since it began, and you sum him up well. Ultimately he only cares about his own career. During covid he never questioned any government response.
Are you serious? He did/said that?
Not that i need another reason to detest that guy, but i'm now at the point of pure and utter disgust.
@lowandodor1150 Yeah, it's in this interview. Not sure about the exact time, sorry. Looked for a clip but couldn't find one.
th-cam.com/video/etpAtC2S0uQ/w-d-xo.htmlsi=4HlZHH6W8gsKy5pk
@@lowandodor1150 Yes I saw that episode as well.
Collectivism around race IS a bad thing. The situation with grooming gangs was ironically exacerbated BECAUSE of race collectivism (police afraid of offending Muslims) rather than treating this as a problem of culture, which isn’t inherently racial.
Yayyy Benjamin. I love that you’re still exploring interesting ideas after all these years. Keep it up ❤
Thanks for the chat!
Thanks for the opportunity!
I think Kissin is a bit of a douche, but I also think that he's fairly honest and that he's more or less correct in his evaluation of Tucker. Tucker is a rat fink.
You're intellectually dishonest shills
You are a liar, you intentionally misinterpreted what Daryl said and claimed that Churchill's Zionist backers were the ONLY reason, when Daryl listed it as potential contributory factor alongside numerous others that he explored.
You guys should have Darryl Cooper on and have a proper discussion over your disagreements.
I’m only halfway through but as tense as this conversation was, this was one of my favorites you’ve ever done and I felt like you this whole conversation
Would you mind expanding on the thought? I felt terrible for a few days after this, then I let it go and now I don’t know how to see it.
"Draw a picture of the globalists" ... I prefer Whitney Webb's characterization. A relationship between organized crime, government, and the corporate blob (an entanglement of corporations that hold shares in each other)
Tech, pharma, finance, defense
The only through line I see connecting "woke right" and "woke left" is that Konstantin just really disagrees with them both.
Nah, he's conveniently lumping in Cooper with the woke right out of personal prejudice, but it is also true that there is a budding right wing faction that is basically "post-truth" and willing to burn down western civilization just to get revenge against their political opponents. If you contrast this with the sobriety of Yarvin's analyses and his emphasis on making the regime change as clean and bloodless as possible, there is a pretty obvious difference, and it seems unlikely that the "post-truth" and "just wanting to see the world burn" mindsets of the woke right are entirely unrelated to the same mindsets found in the woke left.
It is ludicrous of him to classify Cooper with the woke right, but let's not pretend that the broader phenomenon he is describing doesn't exist.
Yeah, it's the horseshoe fallacy.
This is exactly the case and his audience have said the same endlessly.
As soon as he saw alot of 'I'm not sure we can continue funding/ I feel morally comfortable this foreign war '
He mentioned 'the woke right'.
Then when some of his audience suggested the same about Israel he suddenly got filly on board his woke right train.
I don't disagree with him on some of these but I think it's a bit...cheap to then invent the woke right.
So if you put the question to him, do you really think his only response would be "I disagree with them both"?
@@matthewkilbride1669 No. I think he'd go on for a hour twenty of strawmen and appeals to authority which could be accurately boiled down to 'I think they're both dangerous.'
Never seen anyone try so hard to force a new term into the lexicon as KK has with this "woke right" thing
He's correct
@@manofculture584 no he isnt and the term is NOT gonna be adopted by anyone.
@@johnwatts8346 I personly like the term.
@@Daniel-Jack what do you like about it? it doesnt ring at all true to me, but then i am genuinely 'far right', so no fan of kisin.
Seeing the comments, he obviously hits a nerve... I just call them Right Wing Tankies, because that's really what they are, but woke right sounds good too. It's horseshoe theory in action, at this point I see little difference between the blue haired weirdos and the weirdos KK calls "woke right". Especially when all of them start to blame the traditional scapegoat of 2000 years, we know they're all just the same
So I looked up the claim that Russia has decriminalized domestic violence. I found articles claiming this, but they only referenced a law on reduced maximum charges for first time offences in cases that did not result in serious bodily harm.
Does anyone have more detailed description of that law?
If thats all it was, calling that decriminalizng domestic violence seems hyperbolic.
As far as I can tell, it was the rule we typical have in western countries, where the wife is believed if she accuse her husband of violence, even without clear evidence.
Basically, in Russia, you only get persecuted for assault, not for assault in marriage as a separate law.
And, if it does not count as assault if it happen between strangers,
it would not be considered illegal if it happen between couples.
These are also laws, we only got in the West, after 2000.
So, a claim that "domestic violence was decriminalized", would also claim it was not criminal in most European countries before 2000.
I would not want to be a woman in Russian society, but it is not the laws that is the problems.
And claiming it is, is dishonest,
or a typical left wing view, where they think banning guns would make criminals stop using guns.
@@haraldbredsdorff2699 my female friends and relatives are enjoying living in Russia. So it's kinda ridiculous that you wouldn't want to be a woman in Russia.
I'm a big fan of both and have listened to nearly everything both of these guys have posted. I loved this conversation, because it was mostly not about winning. They showed that 2 reasonable people can disagree and have a reasonable conversation.
Good listening! Benjamin is too polite to cut through completely though. KK's dismissal of Darryl Cooper is (IMHO) a bit early, and a bit more forthright than it needs to be. And his interpretation of the Churchill/bribery/debt issue is a prime example of this. Having watched the TC/DC interview, I'm pretty sure from memory that DC was nowhere near as direct as KK makes out. DC would make a good guest on either BB's show or Triggernometry. Also the claim that to be RW in Europe is illegal deserves a little more interrogation. Frustrating that when KK brings up AfD to make a point that it's not illegal, BB didn't mention (quite possibly didn't know) that there is credible, open discussion amongst high-level German pols and journos about making AfD illegal. It's not a question of whether they want to, but how to do it. Finally - as someone pointed out below - BB's not having watched the TC/DC interview is... lax at best. Good people though, and good discussion overall.
I listened to Darryl Cooper's series on zionism and the founding of modern israel before this controversy. I thought it was a very thorough, balanced and compelling account and in no way did Darryl come across as a nazi apologist. Now people who have never engaged with Darryl's work before, who claim to be pro-discourse and open to new ideas, are throwing the kitchen sink of smear tactics at him and his defenders. It's all very pathetic and reinforces Darryl's point that our culture doesn't see WWII as a real historical event with complex causes and motivations behind it. I believe it is perfectly reasonable to question whether Churchill was actually a good actor and that this does not necessitate a defense of hitler or his ideology.
Well I listened to the interview with Tucker Carlson and it was everything Konstantin is describing only even worse. His depiction of WWII wasn't nuanced at all, it was actually very black and white - Hitler was "the good guy" who wanted peace, only invaded the countries he invaded because he wanted to fight communism (including the ones that weren't communist at the time), only killed millions of people for humanitarian reason (he unironically said that btw, he just phrased it a bit differently) and his only flaw was "not planning the war better". Meanwhile Churchill was the bad guy essentially for going to war against Hitler, which he only did because Zionists were paying him off. This is the summary of what he said in the interview with Tucker Carlson, the fact that he used a lot of flowery language to make it sound more palatable to the useful idiots listening, doesn't change the fact that this is basically what he said.
Framing is everything. The framing on Tucker's podcast was "here is an alternate view of the war which might challenge your assumptions" not "here is the correct view of the war". The fact is most people do not want their assumptions about the war challenged. Where we really justified in siding with the soviets even though the soviets were even more murderous and destructive than the fascists? (a point which Kisin himself has made). Is it really true that peace with Germany was never possible? Would it have been desirable? These are real and difficult questions which merit serious discussion.
@@hologramjosh I think people who feel the need to "challenge" our "assumptions" about WWII are simply looking at it from the POV of people who were born a very long time after it ended and for some reason have difficulty understanding what it was like just from looking at the facts. The fact is that Hitler promised to make peace after invading "just one" country and then proceeded to break that promise and started invading all of Europe. It's not even a question of "justified" or "not justified", the fact is that the average British citizen would have had to have been completely retarded to not understand that they were next on the chopping block if they didn't fight back.
@@hologramjosh YT deleted my reply so here's a shorter version: it doesn't matter who was more murderous, the fact is that Hitler was taking over all of Europe and swiftly approaching the UK. Britain was 100% justified in fighting back.
@@hologramjosh They're not difficult questions if you just read the history. H was a much bigger and more immediate threat. (Sorry for the brief reply, yt keeps deleting the elaborate ones).
I'm glad you were able to have a chat despite the initial disagreement, but I'm still left wondering how to define this "Woke Right" as something other than, "people to my right that I believe should be cancelled"
Boyce Face was in evidence, for much of this discussion. I wasn't convinced, either.
heh, and you're equally unable to reply to very simple points
This really goes back to something personal for Konstantin and Russia. And tuckers visit. Complimenting shopping carts really stuck him in the heart.
Was Churchill the chief villain of WWII? That is entirely the question being set out by Darryl Cooper, and for Konstantin to casually assert that this is factually false is revealing his inability to entertain ambiguity and nuance. Cooper’s position was not that Churchill’s actions were measurably more reprehensible than Hitler’s. Rather, he is arguing that the decisions and actions of Churchill precipitated an escalation of atrocities carried out by all participants, including those committed by Hitler. The point being that the outcome of WWII was the worst possible, made so by the decisions taken by Churchill. He was not arguing that Hitler was in any sense the good guy caught up in an unavoidable escalation of malevolence, but that Hitler’s reactionary response was exacerbated and amplified by the provocations that came from Britain.
I am by no means an expert on WWII, far from it. But it seems to me that this is an entirely valid proposition to put forward for debate among historians. Unfortunately, Konstantin’s Manichaeism can only tolerate a singular interpretation of the events of history, and of WWII, in particular. His perception is built upon a foundational myth of the rightness (righteousness?) of Churchill over against the irrepressible evil of Hitler. It seems to me, that for that edifice to be challenged in the slightest is to erode his own metaphysical universe and so he has reacted with such ferocity.
Nicely put. Coopers playful comments touched on topics that are sacred to many, thus the religious outcry
A spiky and interesting conversation. Created more questions than answers for me
I appreciate Konstanin and I appreciate Ben for having him on and hearing him out. I worry when I see so many going off the rails.
"Woke Right" is supposed to be a shock collar term. It is just when the right is no longer parroting the prescribed messaging given to them and DARE to raise an eyebrow in Israel's direction.
It could be viewed that way, or in a way back to you like: “Why is Israel wrong and why are you right?” You’re assuming in your skepticism and stance against Israel that you’re justified in your own opinions, whereas it could all just be subjective. Meaning none of you are right and it’s going to boil down to violence and “might makes”.
@@JordanX767Might does in fact make operational right, when all parties reject the one true God. This so much is obvious in all of human history.
Have you ever considered that there are right wing people in Israel. Most Israelis don't accept this blank slate we are all the same nonsense. Most Israelis want more nationalism and not less. Most Israelis think Europeans are stupid for letting in so many Muslims. The Israeli right winger should be friends with the European right winger and the Indian right winger and act against the liberal globalist.
@@JordanX767Why does Israel fund open borders groups and multiculturalism in foreign countries including the US while cracking down on it in their own? Why is pride in someone's history or heritage only acceptable for their group and no others? It's a double standard everyone has noticed and is getting sick of. If they just said "it's fine for everybody" no one would care but they actively undermine it by speaking out of both sides of their mouths. The truth is simple: it weakens people they don't like and strengthens them and they don't want to have to deal with someone else who can stick up for themselves.
@@sillygoose4472hmm. So do you get to say who the one true God is? Seems to me that the conflict in the middle east does not arise from a lack of religion...
Based on his own definition of an "actual historian" as one who "goes into archives", then surely Kisin must consider David Irving to be a WW2 historian worthy of consideration? We can all guess the answer. Kisin, because of his own biases (and ethnic background), would surely find reasons to denounce Irving's credibility because Irving's portrait of Churchill is of an individual far from being worthy of consideration as "one of the greatest heros of Western civilization".
@@Rapterr15 it's always gerrymandering these lines to exclude the people you want to exclude at the moment. Cooper obviously goes to primary sources all the time, in addition to simply reading books written by historians.
Kisin is not arguing that Churchill wasn´t a fool. Kisin is only arguing that Churchill wasn´t the villain. What´s your point?
@@jesperlykkeberg7438and cooper is arguing that there is no "the" just tons of "a"'s
@@jesperlykkeberg7438 The problem is that Kissen claim Cooper said Churchill was the villain.
So, he is putting words into Coopers mouth that he did not say, so he can brand him as wrong.
@@kiranarise3248but he did say “the”. He didn’t say Churchill was “a villain” he said he was the “chief villain” which would imply that he is the most villainous. He is “THE” villain by that statement
I see two different mindsets at work here.
Kisin’s adherence to orthodox thinking versus Boyce’s free inquiry approach.
❤❤❤ Konstantin ❤❤❤
This is truly and sincerely one of the most disingenuous interviews I've ever seen. There was a time when Konstantin had values and intellectual integrity, and that time has passed. The entire thing was filled with half truths, contradictions and downright hypocrisies to cover for the fact that Konstantin believes he is the arbitor of truth and that everyone on the internet reports to him and is required to stay within the box that he has created for them. Benjamin has the patience of a saint.
Kisin does suck, but so do you. Lindsay and others were right saying you're nutso.
I don’t know what interview you watched but that certainly isn’t how I’d describe Kisin in this interview at all. Sure, he’s opinionated but then again, who isn’t?
@@ThatReadingGuy28 I watched the one in which some guy demanded to be the arbiter of truth for the internet while simultaneously ignoring evidence he doesn’t like.
You are an awful person. Get out of Benjamin's comment section.
Kisen does have a bit of arrogant air but I heard him citing sources and being very polite. I thought this was a beautiful conversation between two genuine men seeking truth. I am completely perplexed by the reactions in the comments section.
All in all, I'm glad this conversation happened
Has either this interviewer or the “historian “ who made these claims ever been to the Churchill War Rooms? Churchill and other leaders worked out strategy and ship and troop movements on large tables. Is that what the so - called historian called “playing with toy soldiers “?
Why didn’t they just use computers 🖥 and big screen TVs? 😂
That was a joke, in case you didn’t notice
Why are you offended by this? One might indeed call that playing with toy soldiers 😂
Konstantin Kontainment Kisin
Quite right!
Ah, so people who disagree with him on war are now woke... laughable. Perhaps some of us just prefer less people dying and proxy wars seem to cause more of it. Ukraine and Israel can certainly defend their own land.
And if they can't, then who gives a shit.
Yes, Churchill was a bad guy and yes his behavior led to ww2. You don’t starve a ppl who surrender.
Winston Churchill strongly advocated for maintaining a naval blockade against Germany even after the surrender in World War I, believing it was crucial to prevent Germany from recovering too quickly and to ensure the Allies' dominance at the peace negotiations; he argued that continuing the blockade would put pressure on Germany to accept harsh peace terms by limiting their access to vital supplies.
Well done both for not blaming feminists for once.
Hopefully BB can pop back on with an addendum... and fix that. lol
Kissen IS the woke right ...
Na, Kissen is left wing. And their is a easy way to spot it.
Claiming Hitler to be right wing.
Anyone who does that, either have not looked into his policies and compared them to others,
or does it, because they do not want Hitler to be on their left wing side.
strong agree... anyone trying to cancel someone else has no place calling anyone else "woke"
That's what I said to myself when I saw the title 😂 I'm not sure anymore though what is left and what is right wing, but he is still defending the establishment even though the woke agenda comes from the establishment. The establishment can still convince him to go to war. Benjamin is also still defending questionable things, like autogynephiles. He is looking at the trans issue from a male perspective and will still consider women to be an issue if they raise issues with genspect in regards to safeguarding. I don't like either of these guys much anymore. They pretend to be open to discussion, but they aren't really.
Underrated comment
@@mirageprincess2768 "The Establishment" is a "Thought terminating cliché " Once you hear those words our mind is already make up before a bebate about it can happen. Let me ask you this, is KK getting many clicks and likes from this? He is taking a big risk calling the right Woke. He is saying something that no else dares say. Whether these men are open to debate or not is not important. The fact they are talking about something much needed and very much relevant is.
I see the point. I'm a staunch Yarvinian and was very curious to see whether I'd be lumped in with the woke right, but it seems like the two defining characteristics of the woke right are:
1. they barely believe in objective truth and have little interest in making rigorous determinations about whether something is factual or not
2. they are willing to burn down everything just to defeat their ideological opponents, even if it leads to boundless misery and the deaths of millions
Yarvin on the other hand may be even more radical than most members of the woke right, but he wants the changes to be made with surgical precision and to cause minimum disruption to commerce, infrastructure, etc. I was quite drawn to the term "barbarian right" but I suppose it is actually a kind of subfaction of the woke right.
When I used to work for the Internationl Lesbian and Gay Association, I corresponded (by letter at that time) with a schoolteacher who worked in southeast Ukraine. Armed with a Ukrainian dictionary and a rather basic grammar of the language, I wrote to him in by very bestest Ukrainian. I received a reply, mostly in Russian, explaining that neither he, any of his family, any of his neighbours, or any of the children he taught, actually spoke Ukrainian. That was about the time when the Kiev (or Kyiv, if you prefer) government was trying to impose the Ukrainian language on the entire country.
However extreme you may find Russia's response, it cannot seriously be argued that western Ukraine played no part in fueling resentment among Ukraine's (very large) Russian-speaking minority. The comedian (his real former profession, not my disparagement) who is now President of Ukraine himself has Russian as his native language.
I feel like I should do a live stream watching this...
brevity is the soul of wit
Please do. He's been testing plenty of people's patience and I don't have the liver to drink through this. Plus it'll be funny. He's been going downhill for a while now.
@@johnnyboy2537 BAB or Kisin?
@@pointcuration1278 Kisin. I like Boyce. Kisin has been going downhill the last year or so at least
Can’t wait mr spoon! Would defo watch
Kisin didn't refute anything that Tucker or his guest said. He was just talking about his hurt feelings the entire time.
Yes, the guy who runs the podcast "Triggernometry" is very triggered by people who are actually right-wing. He's a joke.
And hurt they were.
@@publicanimal. But the right is pretty large with numerous belief systems that are antagonistic towards each other. The anti-J issue is a bit troubling
@@brianmeen2158 You can take issue with that all you want, but Konstantin needs to account for why he feels that ethno-nationalism is acceptable for the J but considers it "woke" when it's adopted by Westerners.
What about this one? BTW Kisin did a whole video on that with another historian. th-cam.com/video/53x0FECym2M/w-d-xo.html
Very glad KOnstantin is bringing this up and creating this new idea because its very very true and relevant.
I'd have been happy just to listen to Konstantin the whole time and not have to watch Benjamin screwing up his I'm-trying-to-get-my-head-round-this face. Konstantin was clarity personified while Benjamin was murk, uncertainty and confusion incarnate. He even seemed confused about what he himself believes. Halfway through it became clear to him that he hadn't even watched the video around which this whole discussion revolved, which suggests a complacency that he might have got away with someone as vague as himself, and probably has done in the past. And all the time Konstantin remains courteous.
Konstantin A +
Benjamin D -
First time watching Boyce for me, so I just assumed at the beginning of the interview he was just playing devil's advocate and that was his thing. 40+ minutes in, I'm now very confused as to what his goals with this were and what he was ultimately trying to accomplish. I think your hypothesis of him not being clear on what he believes about the issues discussed here is very apt.
Amazing comment. I think you summarized the thoughts of basically *everyone* watching the video.
This is probably my worst piece of work. Yours criticisms are accepted. Thanks for watching and expressing your take.
@@BenjaminABoyce I really enjoyed the discussion. You were humble & open. Best of all you didn’t interrupt Konstantin needlessly. Thank you
I almost had to pinch myself when I discovered the man who initiated the interview didn’t fucking bother to watch the source material he wanted to discuss. I don’t know who this guy Boyce is but boy, does he look stupid and childish. Astounding level of unpreparedness. Every silly podcaster now fancies themselves a journalist, just like millions with iPhones in hand think themselves as equal to professional photographers.
Wow Konstantin is just a butthurt lib after all
_Always has been_
What a strong argument 🙂. I see you can have any. Name calling is not an argument.
@@Pipervojtanot writing out an essay length critique in a yt comment and not having an argument are not the same thing.
You sound like the butthurt one around here tbh
@@NotQuiteFirst I dig you
Was unconvinced by this Kisin character's perspective
Kisin made a good point about how when the woke left vilifies our heroes, it’s laughable and cringe, but when the woke right do it, it’s laudable and based
No you're just demonstrating Cooper's point. Churchill (and WW2) is a sort of foundational myth for you in the way that the founding fathers would be for other people. That's literally the point he's making.
That's very bad point. The idea is that it's good to criticize "heroes" for not being right wing enough, cause the right is actually good.
You are making Cooper's point because you are implicitly acknowledging that some people are treating WW2 and Churchill as a foundational myth in the way others see the founding fathers as foundational myth/heroes.
You are making Cooper's point because you are implicitly acknowledging that some people are treating WW2 and Churchill as a foundational myth in the way others see the founding fathers as foundational myth/heroes.
@@unknownknowable But that historian wasn't criticising Churchill for "not being right wing enough", he was labelling Churchill as the chief villian of WW2. KK is saying that's wrong, as are other claims that guest of tucker's made, as KK noted. And KK had Neil Ferguson on to discuss the subject too.
I agree with much of what KK said, but he really needs to watch Academic Agent's "Demoralization" video to better understand what BB was saying right at the end. And while I have a lot of problems with cooper/carlson, it is a useful hyperbole to say that right wing thought has been "made illegal", it certainly has here in Canada
Konstantin is beyond overrated. Don't understand the fascination with this guy
Kisin says that, for him, wokeism stands for absence of truth and that’s why he calls Darryl woke. However, Darryl doesn’t say that there’s no truth, on the contrary, he claims there is truth, but it’s different to the current narrative around wwii.
Kisin also stated that Darryl said a bunch of lies, but didn’t present a single lie. The opinion about who was the “greatest villain”, something that Darryl said was a hyperbole, is just that - an opinion. It’s neither true or false since it’s not a fact, but a judgement.
No . I think saying Churchill was the biggest bad guy of ww2 IS An absolute lie. No judgement needed. It's a fact
Kisin is apart of the woke right 😅
The only problem with this statement is the implication that Kisin is part of the right at all
15:00 "its lie to call it forbidden fruit"
Ok KK why is it illegal to question many of these points in European nation's?
I think the point is that there's ample historical discussion of this in the actual history books, with the strongest account still being the one that *is* generally accepted. It's not illegal (hyperbole), so much as illiterate. And illiteracy propagated on mass scale is dangerous. Cooper isn't being lambasted for making a compelling counter-case, but for being legitimized when he's ultracrepidarian. That's what I think KK is saying.
@bilikfinke9197 dude it's literally illegal to question certain points of WW 2 in some European countries. And no there isn't ample discussion as this controversy illustrates. Cooper whether factual or not, poked a sacred cow and that's the reaction by most people. Only the Left gets to dig this deep
Konstatin is right on virtually everything he says here. The term "Woke" is supposed to mean "awakened (to social injustice)" but was first used by somone unfamiliar with the English language who used "woke" out of ignorance.
It implies that becoming aware of differences between individuals, demographics, ethnic, culturrs, nationalities, wellbeing, wealth or geography l justifies outrage, vocalised or enacted as protest, violence or some form of disruptive action. Which it doesn't.
Though rather less likely to happen on the political right (due to tolerance and protection of individual rights rather than identity politics and hate), it can happen that the outrageous actions of the woke left are vilified by the right, thus becoming the "woke right".
Wouldn't it be nice if everyone just calmed down and focused on their individual contributions to society rather than criticising others?
Phun phact: phenomenon is the singular of phenomena.
Benjamin has done so many fine interviews. It was a wide ranging discussion. Konstantine lives in the UK. He is not a US voter. Particularly before Presidential elections, Republican supporters band together and may see even those who are enablers of fascism as allies. Democrats may see even ultra left hardline Marzists as allies. Freedom in the US seems to allow almost all political shades.
Most of the world may seem very far from the US. The US has given very considerable support to Ukraine for which immense gratitude is appropriate. There are many Ukrainians in the US many of whom are US voters. The US continues to support european countries. It has a long history of doing so. The world will have to wait till January to experience the policies of the next President. Most of the world are not US voters.
I agree with most of what Konstantin said.
Correction the US support is to Western Ukraine it is to the detriment of Eastern Ukraine and as with the US attack on Europe's Noordstream pipeline the only country that has benefitted from the so called US support is the US!
"Woke" is where the head of the ouroboros eats the tail.
Thank God for Konstantin
I have high respect for Konstantin but this stance along with his views on Pearl hosting Nick F, make me think he's not a true free speech advocate. If you believe Churchill was an angel and Hitler was a demon then get a grip. They were people, that's it.
His views were that Pearl should have challenged NF's views. That's not anti free speech, genius. And the discussion wasn't whether churchill was an angel .. It was with tucker's guest claiming that Churchill was the chief villian of WW2.
I don't think you understand free speech. Just because you get to say whatever you want, does not mean people cannot respond to what you say however they want.
The truth is real and attainable. If you forsake that, you are doomed.
The truth is real and attainable but it is impossible to know when you have it.
I like Konstantin. I wish more people would listen to him.
Agreed, but he’s wrong here.
@@corriemooney9812 He is trying to objectively look at the both sides. The phenomenon is real and I’m glad someone was able to understand it and articulate it. I'd rather follow the truth than popular people no matter how good they seem.
@@amorino7776 It’s not ‘woke’ though. That has a distinct meaning that we need to preserve. I saw the term ‘broken right’ somewhere - that’s good.
@@amorino7776 No hes not lmao. You can hear him get audibly upset at the idea at Churchill being called a villain, which he incorrectly interprets as downplaying the mass murder of his ethnicity. He is 100% embedded into the ruling ideology, which you will call "the center" because all critiques of it have to be placed outside it. It is the center because it is the center.
@@Riposte8 He critiques what you call a ruling ideology in many of his other videos.
The ending was classic! As soon as Konstatin worked out what Boyce really thinks he was like 'you're nuts I'm out of here" and I don't blame him.
I gave it a like purely because of KK. Very informed. If you are on the right side of history, the arguments are very easy.
Right at 1:18:00 he slips up and says Dissident Right. Buck = Broken.
I love Churchill. I couldn’t care less if he played with toy soldiers. And the assertion that he was compromised by financial issues isn’t a third rail idea. It merits discussion . Why not?
What is Kisin afraid of? Why is he so adamant that these ideas not be explored?
Maybe it's because of the people asking the question and their motives? Maybe it's that we live in an age where nobody knows what to believe and a lie circles the globe thrice before the truth catches up. Maybe because the UK is hanging on by a thread and a lot of that strength left to us is how we see ourselves in the perspective of WW2 and that we stood alone against evil for 2 years and held the line with our blood, treasure and empire until we could gather strength and allies for the push back and destruction of fascism in Europe. We sacrificed a lot for a point of principle. We could have given up. We could have done what Darrell said and accepted Hitlers poison chalice but we said NO. And that bravery to do that came from Churchill. He was the first one to step forward with courage and the rest of the country and empire followed him. He was a great man. Despite his flaws.
He’s getting on my nerves with this.
Great discussion Benjamin. I love to see respectful and productive discourse. You are the master of emapthic conversation and I try to emulate you in that.
I hope triggernometry invites you on their podcast to interview you on your work with gender. I would love to watch that.
I’m in a very similar spot as Benjamin. Quite confused on a few big issues and def notice the anti-Jewish and anti-woman rhetoric on the right. That needs to be dialed down
@@brianmeen2158 I don't care for the term woke right but there is definitely a retrograde flank. Less concerned with what can be done to bring this country back from the brink and more concerned with its petty grievances and hatred of other.
Intersting debate. And I agree more with Konstantin Kisin, though he is wrong about Ukraine. Ukraine and Poland and other countries still use vast amounts of Soviet weapons, And surrendering Crimea and Donbas will buy Ukraine and the West absolutely nothing except more grief. Let Ukraine win or expect American troops to fight in Poland or Germany. As for Churchill, he declared he would never forgive the Israelis for executing British soldiers before the 1948 war.
This is one of your best interviews IMO. I appreciate you having him on. And even more, I appreciate both of you remaining calm and respectful.
You're a class act, Mr. Boyce. Kisin is atrocious though.
I wish you had had a bit more background on the interview and in WW2.
Kisin did steamroll you and had you had a bit more background you would have been able to push back
@@BenjaminABoyce He really was triggered by that WW2 interview!
So I'm here for Konstantin, but oh God this is hard to listen to. The guy who is the presenter is so uninformed and does not have ALL THE FACTS that it baffels me how he can have an opinion on a ham sandwich, let alone any complex political issue.
30 minutes in and surprised I still haven't heard the magic words uttered: the Enlightenment. What Konstantin identifies as "woke," across partisan lines, isn't a critique of the West in the broadest historical sense but more precisely a critique of the Enlightenment -- of human beings understood as rational, truth-seeking actors; of legitimate authority produced only through the free consent of such rational, truth-seeking actors. For there are various tendencies within "the West," itself, that predate and indeed oppose the claims of the Enlightenment specifically; this leads to a curious bind for self-professed conservatives: some conservatives are looking to conserve the insights *of* the Enlightenment (in the face of modern skepticism); some conservatives, however, are looking to conserve what came *before* the Enlightenment.
I'm trying to understand wth KK is doing.
He is doing containment.
@@SecretCervix Primarily strawmaning.
he's trying to tell you to stop being reactionary sheeple, like woke people are.
Referring to WWII mythology deniers as "woke right" literally demonstrates the conservative suspicion ABOUT that mythology 😅
This guy has always been controlled opposition.
He cares about the interests of his group. And by his group, I don't mean Russians, comedians, or podcasters.
@@NotQuiteFirst Exactly.